Peer Production Everywhere

Christian Siefkes – March 2009

Peer Production Everywhere

Thoughts About a Society Based on Commons and Peer Production—And How to Get There

Commons-based Production in the Past

In many times and in many areas, production was organized around a pool
of commons.

Open Field System: European agriculture during the Middle Ages.

Water, air, forests and land have traditionally been “in the commons.”

Commons are managed and used by people, but they can’t be
private property in the usual (modern) sense of the word.

Garrett Hardin got it wrong: commons were not “anything goes” areas, they
were governed by community-defined rules.

The true “Tragedy of the Commons” was the enclosure of the commons:
The commons did not collapse, they were “stolen.”

Commons-based Peer Production Today

Traits of Peer Production

(1) Peer production is based on contributions (not on exchange). Peer
projects have a common goal and every participant contributes to
this goal in some way or other.

People contribute to a project because they want it to succeed, not because
they need or want to make money—it’s use value, not exchange
value, that motivates them.

The effort required to reach the common goal is shared among those who care
enough to contribute (“effort sharing”).

Traits of Peer Production

(2) Peer production is based on free cooperation (not on coercion or
command). There are structures, but no command hierarchies: Nobody can
order others to do something, and nobody is forced to obey others.

Structures can and will adapt: If participants of a project are
unhappy about some aspects of the project they can try to convince the
others to change them. If that fails, they can still fork the project:
they can break away from the others and do their own thing.

Traits of Peer Production

(3) Peer production is based on commons and possession (not on
property).Commons such as free software and open knowledge play an
important role as input or output (or both) of peer projects.

Where things are not commons, they matter as possession (something that
can be used), not as property (something that can be sold).

The Future of Commons-based Production

If the renaissance of commons-based production continues, what might be
the result? How might a society based on commons and peer production
look like?

What can we learn from the past and present?

Commons need communities.

Communities make their own rules to protect and strengthen the
commons.

A commons-based society will be based on communities which develop
their own rules for creating, maintaining, and handling the commons
they create and use.

Production will be organized around a pool of commons created and
maintained by these communities.

Typical Principles of Such a Society?

(1) Everyone can give as they like.

People self-select to do things which they consider important or which
they like to do.

Often, the things which people like to do most are also the things they
do best.

This does not mean that every contribution will be accepted: others
have to trust the contributor or convince themselves that their
contribution is sound.

Typical Principles of Such a Society?

(2) Taking from the commons means taking something as possession, not as
property.

Possession is what I use.

Property is something I can sell or commercialize at will.

The apartment I’ve rented is in my possession, but it’s the
property of my landlord/-lady.

Commons can often become possession, but never property (in the full
sense of the word).

In a commons-based society, the resources and means of production are
commons. The produced goods are commons or possession.

(2) Commons can become possession, but not property

Without property, there is no profit.

In commons-based societies, production is motivated by other reasons
than in capitalism:

People help to produce something because they want to have it.

They self-select themselves to do tasks which they enjoy doing.

They support production in order to give something back to the
community.

…

→ There are ample reasons why production takes place even where there
is no profit.

Typical Principles of Such a Society?

(3) Everyone can take commons into possession, as long as they don’t take
them away from others.

Just like today: everybody can freely take free software and free
content without having to give anything back, since by taking them you
don’t take them away from others.

Works for everything that can be copied at practically zero cost.

Typical Principles of Such a Society?

(4) If taking would mean taking away, the best way of solving this
problem is to produce enough to satisfy everybody’s wishes.

If things cannot be copied freely, taking needs social agreements.

If you and me both want to use the bicycle, who’ll get it?

It might be possible to solve such problems by arranging production
so as to ensure that there are enough goods for those who want them.

“We need to produce another bicycle.”

If there’s enough for everyone interested,taking doesn’t become
taking away.

Typical Principles of Such a Society?

(5) The second best way is to distribute limited goods in a fair
manner.

Organizing production requires effort, and the community must
find a way to distribute this effort.

The ideal case is that effort distributes itself more or less
spontaneously.

BitTorrent: the more bandwidth you provide for upload (allowing
others to get the files they want), the more bandwidth you’ll get for
download (allowing yourself to get the files you want) → giving and
taking are coupled.

(4+5) How to Share Effort and Goods?

(4+5) How to Share Effort and Goods?

(4+5) How to Share Effort and Goods?

Effort is shared among those who can contribute—if you’re unable
(unwilling?) to contribute, you don’t have to (everybody else will have
to contribute slightly more).

How to share natural resources?

Resources are commons; they are pooled together with goods and
tasks.

If there is enough of a resource, it is available for free (since
no effort is necessary to produce it).

Otherwise, auctioning might be a suitable way for resource
allocation: those who are ready to contribute most effort get the
right to use them.

→ By contributing more effort, you make life easier for everybody
else, because all the other pool members now have to contribute
slightly less.

Resources are usually only available for using, not for using
up.

Typical Principles of Such a Society?

(6) Cooperation will be organized by area and by interest, and units of
cooperation will nest and overlap as appropriate.

Lots of projects produce specific goods.

Local associations of different sizes handle the things that concern
all the people living in a specific area.

Associations and projects cooperate as reasonable to handle
activities that can be better organized at a larger scale, and to
manage and share resources.

(6) Local Cooperation

(6) Cooperation Between Projects

Typical Principles of Such a Society?

(7) Production will take place in projects of people who work together on
an equal footing (as peers).

As mentioned: Peer production is based on free cooperation (not
on coercion or command): Nobody can order others to do something, and
nobody is forced to obey others.

Maintainers only lead by example and by convincing others that
their proposals make sense.

Structures evolve: If participants are unhappy about aspects of a
project, they can try to convince the others to change them.

If that fails, they can fork the project and do their own thing.

What Difference Would It Make?

Demand-driven instead of profit-driven production: production
takes place to fulfill people’s needs and desires,not to turn
money into more money.

The Struggle for Peer Production

The core challenge: Organizing a new mode of production, based on
commons and cooperation among peers → this is already taking place.

The Struggle for Peer Production

Freeing the means of production, so they won’t be used only for
purposes of companies or the state:

Computers and Internet access have already been sufficiently
“common” and affordable (in the Western world, at least), to make free
software, Wikipedia, Wireless community networks, and file sharing a
reality.

Something similar starts to become possible for some areas of material
production → decentralized on-demand production, rapid manufacturing,
permaculture…

It’s advantageous when means of production become sufficiently
affordable that “normal people” (or small groups of people) can buy
them.

It’s even better when we can produce them ourselves: so far, that’s
mainly the case with digital means of production (programming
languages, compilers, and other tools for programmers and professionals
as free software). But with open hardware projects such as
Arduino, Openmoko, Appropedia, Factor E Farm, Open Source Fab Labs,
Free Telephony Project we’re getting there for physical means of
production, too.

The Struggle for Peer Production

Freeing the natural resources: they can be bought (→ Cost
Recovery), or they can be freed by making them commons → struggles
for public/general access to and use of natural resources (such as land)
can facilitate conditions for generalized peer production, esp. in poorer
countries.

Favorable Conditions for Peer Production

Modular approaches based on specialized components that can be
combined in versatile ways (GNU/Unix tools philosophy) → there is
no need to re-invent the same (free) wheels again and again.

Low barriers of entry—affordable means of production.

Organizational Models

Open design, profit-driven manufacturing: Free the design, sell the
product

→ not bad, but may be risky, since it automatically subjects you to
market logic.

Open Production Club: jointly produce for the club members, everybody
can join

→ it’s better to clearly separate the external logic of
capitalism (based on exchange and money), from the internal logic of
pooling and cooperation (where there might be coupling between giving
and taking, but never exchange).

Cost Recovery

How do we get the money for the things we still have to buy, since we
can’t produce them ourselves?

Pass-through: individual users must pay their share of external
costs—would exclude those that cannot pay (unless special care is
taken of this case, e.g. through a special pool of donations).

Suggested contributions: payment is voluntary, but suggested (as
used for this conference).

Membership fees: membership may be voluntary or obligatory—in the
latter case, people who can’t pay would be excluded (used by hacker
spaces such as the Berlin
c-base, which are also open to non-members).

Sponsorship: like donations, but depends on one or a few generous
donors → might create dependencies.

Effort Recovery

How to ensure that production actually takes place?

None: leave it entirely to individual decisions whether and how
people give back to the project/pool—as done in free software → might
not work as well for physical production.

Suggested contributions: as for cost recovery, but suggest giving
back time (effort) instead of money.

Couple giving and taking: only active contributors may benefit →
would exclude those that cannot contribute, unless special care is
taken of this case.